Originally posted by Kinso
View Post
For example, they use Story A in two different courts but, never repeat Story A in the same court house. But, Story A is the same in Peel, Durham, Toronto, Hamilton. It appears though in each court house, in different client files, and almost identical in the logical outlay and often the paragraphs are ordered exactly the same and use the same words. 30% of them are 1:1 direct cut-and-paste that any professor reading papers would see from students who have all copied the same essay. They just professor shop.
I did assist a lawyer demonstrate that the other party's "story" was not authentic, factual, etc... and was just a recital of previous client's story's told time and time again. It was fun to watch the judge's reaction to actual affidavit materials, all sworn by the same lawyer, all with the same story and matching paragraphs.
If the courts go digital I am going to donate my software so every submitted affidavit gets validated for plagiarism in both actual word and logic function. The future is coming... Lawyers should really worry like a College Student copy'n a paper that should be original thought and word... If a college can use this to assess a student's paper it is not hard to do with a standard form like an affidavit. Google has tools that do this already.
There are too many "you should have known better" speeches given by judges to lawyers with no resulting action. I have watched Mossip, Richette, Pazaratz, Czutrin, Lemon, Chappel, and even the most honourable Mr. Justice Quinn question a lawyer's judgement on the audacity of a "long shot".
It is indeed "rare" for costs to be ordered against a lawyer. But, the age of automation and COVID-19 is upon us. Pandemics have this nifty way of increasing automation. With the courts having to go virtual and the acceleration of this after COVID-19... A big change is coming.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/cogniti.../#3d8d80c31f00
Comment